A bill to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to eliminate the consumptive demand exception relating to the importation of goods made with forced labor.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of a resolution introduced by myself, Senator McConnell, Senator Leahy, Senator McCain, Senator Brownback, and Senator Obama to renew the sanctions imposed on Burma by the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.

Last year, in response to the failure by the military junta--the State Peace and Development Council, SPDC--to take any meaningful steps towards restoring democracy and releasing Nobel Peace Prize winner and National League for Democracy, NLD, leader Aung San Suu Kyi, Congress overwhelmingly renewed a complete ban on all imports from Burma for another year.

One year later, it is clear that Rangoon has once again failed to make ``substantial and measurable progress'' toward putting Burma on a irreversible path of national reconciliation and democracy.

Suu Kyi remains under house arrest. On her 60th birthday on June 19, 2005, she will have spent a total of 2,523 days in detention.

NLD Vice Chairman Tin Oo has also remained in custody since May 2003. And 1,400 political prisoners are still in jail.

The military junta's ``road map'' to democracy and national convention to draft a new constitution has produced no timetable for restoring democracy and shut out the participation of Suu Kyi and the NLD, the legitimate winners of the 1990 elections.

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights passed a resolution last month highlighting continued human rights abuses by Rangoon including ``extrajudicial killings,'' rape, torture, sex trafficking and forced labor.

And let us not forget that Congress passed the original ``Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003'' in response to a brutal coordinated assault by progovernment paramilitary thugs on Suu Kyi and other members of the NLD. Is anyone surprised that no one has been brought to justice for these crimes?

The generals who run the country have shown a remarkable ability to ignore the demands of their own people and the international community. The simple truth is that as long as the SPDC remains in power the democratic hopes and aspirations of the Burmese people will continue to be denied.

Now is not the time to let the sanctions expire and try to ``engage'' the military junta.

Doing so without any meaningful steps toward democracy taken by Rangoon would only serve to bolster the regime's campaign against democratic government, the rule of law, and basic human rights.

I point out that the democratic movement in Burma continues to support sanctions against the SPDC. We must give them more time to effect change in Burma.

Let us not fall into the trap of thinking true representative democracy cannot come to Burma and the Burmese people. I agree with Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick when he said recently:

What we see throughout the world, even in places where

people don't expect it, like the Middle East, is a process of

openness and democracy. There's no reason it can't happen in

Burma as well.

As champions of freedom and respect for human rights, we must stand in solidarity with Suu Kyi, the people of Burma, and the international community in once again calling on the SPDC to release Suu Kyi, relinquish power, and respect the 1990 elections. Archbishop Desmond Tutu has rightly said:

As long as [Suu Kyi] remains under house arrest, none of us

is truly free.

In the face of human rights abuses and terror, approximately 300,000 Burmese citizens have already defied the military junta and signed their names on a petition calling for true democratic change in Burma. We must back their courage. I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.

Mr. McCain. Mr. President, I would like to thank Senators McConnell and Feinstein for their efforts to renew again the sanctions contained in the 2003 Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act. I am proud to join along with Senators Leahy, Brownback, and Obama as sponsors of this resolution.

As we take action to renew this legislation, the situation inside Burma grows ever dimmer. The military junta in that country controls the population through a campaign of violence and terror, and the lack of freedom and justice there is simply appalling. The Burmese regime has murdered political opponents, used child soldiers and forced labor, and employed rape as a weapon of war. Political activists remain imprisoned, including elected members of parliament, and Aung San Suu Kyi remains a captive.

Aung San Suu Kyi's courageous and steadfastness in the face of tyranny inspires me and, I believe, every individual who holds democracy dear. Because she stands for freedom, this heroic woman has endured attacks, arrest, captivity, and untold sufferings at the hands of the regime. Burma's rulers fear Aung San Suu Kyi because of what she represents--peace, freedom and justice for all Burmese people. The thugs who run the country have tried to stifle her voice, but they will never extinguish her moral courage. Her leadership and example shine brightly for the millions of Burmese who hunger for freedom and for those of us outside Burma who seek justice for its people.

The work of Aung San Suu Kyi and the members of the National League for Democracy must be the world's work. We must continue to press the junta until it is willing to negotiate an irreversible transition to democratic rule. The Burmese people deserve no less. And I see encouraging signs that the world is no longer content to sit on the sidelines.

The U.S. Congress has been in the forefront, and we stepped up our pressure significantly in 2003 with the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act. In doing so, we took active steps to pressure the military junta, and we sent a signal to the Burmese people that they are not forgotten--that the American people care about their freedom and will stand up for justice in their country.

Now the Europeans and the countries of Southeast Asia are finally stepping up their own pressure. While they can and should do more, the signs are encouraging. I have recently seen a report that 78 Thai senators have sponsored a motion opposing Burma's chairmanship of ASEAN, scheduled for next year. Similar moves by governments of other Southeast Asian nations suggest that opposition to Burma's rotation is becoming widespread, as it should--ASEAN's credibility would crumble under Burmese leadership. A unified message from all ASEAN countries that Burma's behavior is simply unacceptable would make clear to its leaders that they cannot practice repression forever.

For our part, I support today the joint resolution that will renew the import restrictions--sanctions that are

supported by the National League for Democracy. These restrictions must remain until Burma embarks on a true path of reconciliation--a process that must include the NLD and Burmese ethnic minorities.

The picture today in Burma is tragically clear. So long as a band of thugs rules Burma, its people will never be free. They will remain mired in poverty and suffering, cut off from the world, with only their indomitable spirit to keep them moving forward. With our action today, we will support this spirit.

Mr. President, today I am introducing ``The Restoring Safety to Indian Women Act'' and I look forward to working with the Committee on the Judiciary to ensure that the provisions of this bill are given consideration, particularly as the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act moves forward. I also wish to thank Senator Byron Dorgan for co-sponsoring this legislation and for his dedication to addressing the health and welfare needs of Indian tribes.

This legislation creates a new Federal criminal offense authorizing Federal prosecutors to charge repeat domestic violence offenders before they seriously injure or kill someone and to use tribal court convictions for domestic violence for that purpose. It authorizes the creation of tribal criminal history databases to document these convictions and protection orders for use by all law enforcement. The bill authorizes BIA and tribal officers to make arrests for domestic violence assaults committed outside of their presence and would authorizes a comprehensive study of domestic violence in Indian Country to determine its impact to Indian tribes.

The 1994 Violence Against Women Act has had a tremendous impact on raising the national awareness of domestic violence and providing communities, including Indian tribes, the resources to respond to the devastating impact of domestic violence. National studies show that one in four women are victims of domestic violence. Since 1999, the Department of Justice has issued various studies which report that Indian women experience the highest rates of domestic violence compared to all other groups in the United States. These reports state that one out of every three Indian women are victims of sexual assault; that from 1979 to 1992, homicide was the third leading cause of death of Indian females between the ages of 15 to 34 and that 75 percent of those deaths were committed by a family member or acquaintance. These are startling statistics that require our close examination and a better understanding of how to prevent and respond to domestic violence in Indian Country.

Domestic violence is a national problem and not one that is unique to Indian Country. Yet, due to the unique status of Indian tribes, there are obstacles faced by Indian tribal police, Federal investigators, tribal and Federal prosecutors and courts that impede their ability to respond to domestic violence in Indian Country. This bill is intended to remove these obstacles at all levels and to enhance the ability of each agency to respond to acts of domestic violence when they occur.

The division of criminal jurisdiction between Federal and tribal law enforcement and prosecutors working in Indian Country present challenges. For example, Federal prosecutors prosecute acts of domestic violence in Indian Country using the Assault or, unfortunately, the Murder statutes in the Major Crimes Act. These statutes require the prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim was disfigured, suffered a serious risk of death or was killed before these felony charges can be filed. Meanwhile, the research has shown that perpetrators of domestic violence become increasingly more violent over time. Under the existing statutory scheme, these perpetrators may escape felony charges until they seriously injure or kill someone.

This bill would create a new Federal offense aimed at the habitual domestic violence offender and allow tribal court convictions to count for purposes of Federal felony prosecution when the perpetrator has at least two separate Federal, State or tribal convictions for crimes involving assault, sexual abuse or a violent felony against a spouse or intimate partner. This provision is similar to many state laws that apply a felony penalty to an individual who commits multiple offenses. It will empower Indian tribal prosecutors and courts to document domestic violence cases at the local level and give federal prosecutors the ability to intervene in the cycle of violence by charging repeat offenders before they seriously injure or kill someone.

The bill would also encourage the use of existing grants authorized by the Violence Against Women Act to create tribal criminal history databases for use by Indian tribes and tribal, State and Federal law enforcement agencies to document final convictions, stay away orders and orders of protection issued by tribal courts. As I understand it, no such database exists today. This database would be used solely as a law enforcement and court tracking tool. It would enable tribal, State and Federal law enforcement officers to determine whether an individual is a habitual domestic violence offender and therefore subject to the felony crime described above. It also would enhance the implementation of the criminal provisions that already exist in the Violence Against Women Act.

All manner of law enforcement agencies report that responding to domestic violence disturbances are among the most dangerous situations that a police officer faces. Therefore, many States have enacted immediate arrest or removal policies that enable responding officers to diffuse these dangerous situations. Currently, the primary law enforcement authority for Indian tribes, the BIA police, are only authorized to make an arrest without a warrant for an offense committed in Indian Country if the offense is committed in the presence of the officer or the offense is a felony. This legislation would expand the authority of the BIA police, and tribal police agencies that derive their arrest authority by contract with the BIA, to make an arrest without a warrant for a domestic violence offense when the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the person arrested committed the offense. This arrest authority will enable a responding officer to diffuse the dangerous situation by arresting the perpetrator. This will go a long way toward improving public safety for both the officer and the domestic violence victim.

Finally, while the national data on the rates of violence affecting Indian women are astounding, we do not know the full extent to which Indian women residing in Indian Country are impacted by domestic violence or the impact of domestic violence on Indian tribes. For example, we know that nationally, domestic violence costs $4.1 billion each year for direct medical and mental health services and in my own State of Arizona, last year, police received approximately 100,000 domestic violence calls, but we do not know the extent to which tribal prevention programs, law enforcement, court or medical intervention resources are similarly impacted. Therefore, this bill would require that a comprehensive study be done on the scope of the domestic violence problem in Indian Country.

I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Indian Affairs Committee and the Judiciary Committee to ensure that these statistics become a record of the past. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with my colleague from Connecticut, Mr. Dodd, legislation that will bolster the content and pedagogical knowledge of our K-12 teacher workforce. This measure provides resources and incentives to enlist college and university faculties in partnerships with public school districts throughout the Nation in an effort to strengthen public school instruction.

My proposal will establish, over the next five years, forty new Teacher Professional Development Institutes in locales throughout the Nation. Based on the model which has been operating at Yale University and the City of New Haven for over 25 years, Teacher Professional Development Institutes consist of partnerships between one or more institutions of higher education and local, economically disadvantaged public school systems. These Institutes will strengthen the present teacher workforce by giving participants an opportunity to gain more sophisticated content knowledge and instructional skills, and will provide them a chance to develop--in conjunction with their Institute colleagues--practical curriculum units that they can implement in their classrooms and share with their schools and districts.

Since 1978, the Yale-New Haven Institute has offered five to seven thirteen-session seminars each year, led by Yale faculty, on topics that teachers have selected to enhance their teaching mastery. To begin the process, teacher representatives from the Institute solicit teachers throughout the school district for ideas on how to help meet their perceived needs--for example, improving content area knowledge, preparing instructional materials, managing the classroom, or addressing accountability standards. As a consensus emerges regarding seminar content, the Institute director identifies and enlists university faculty members with the appropriate expertise, interest, and desire to lead the seminar. Because the topics are ultimately determined by the teachers who participate, seminars offer content which teachers believe is pertinent, valuable, and practical for both themselves and their students.

It is, in fact, the cooperative and emergent nature of the Institute seminar planning process that ensures its success--rigorous topical instruction

and relevant materials are provided based on participants' self- identified needs. Granted the opportunity to examine and act on their own skills and knowledge, teachers gain a sense of self-sufficiency, and are more enthusiastic about their participation. Teachers gain further confidence as they practice using the materials they obtain and develop among their peers, ensuring that the experience not only increases their subject-matter proficiency, but also provides immediate hands-on active learning materials that can be transferred to the classroom. In short, by allowing teachers to determine the seminar subjects and providing them the resources to develop curricula relevant to their classroom and their students, the Institutes empower teachers. Teachers are the front line--they are the interface between the educational system and the students it aspires to shape and inform--and they know what should be done to improve their schools and increase student achievement. The Teacher Professional Development Institutes promote this philosophy.

From 1999-2002, the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute conducted a National Demonstration Project to create comparable Institutes at four diverse sites with large concentrations of disadvantaged students. These demonstration projects were located in Pittsburgh, PA; Houston, TX; Albuquerque, NM; and Santa Ana, CA. Based on the success of that Project, the Institute has launched the Yale National Initiative--a long-term endeavor to establish exemplary Teachers Institutes in states throughout the nation, just as the legislation I have introduced would do.

Follow-up evaluations have garnered encouraging reactions from teachers who have participated both in the Yale-New Haven Institute and in the demonstration Institutes. These data strongly support the conclusions that virtually all teachers felt substantially strengthened in their mastery of content knowledge and that they developed increased expectations for students' achievement. Further, because of their personal involvement in the course selection and curriculum development process, teacher participants have found these seminars to be especially relevant and useful in their classroom practices--in fact, ninety-five percent of all participating teachers reported them to be beneficial. Finally, study results have found that these Institutes foster teacher leadership, develop supportive teacher networks, heighten university faculty commitments to improving K-12 public education, and create more positive partnerships between school districts and institutions of higher education--something I believe is essential to improving students' readiness for college.

Several studies assert that teacher quality is the single most important school-related factor in determining student achievement. Accordingly, the No Child Left Behind Act requires a ``highly qualified'' teacher to be in every classroom by the end of the 2005- 2006 academic year. Effective teacher professional development programs that focus on content area and pedagogical knowledge are proven means of enhancing the success of classroom teachers and helping to meet the ``highly qualified'' criteria. Yet, a 2003 Government Accountability Office Report on Teacher Quality found that many state and local school districts view shortcomings in their current professional development practices as a significant barrier to meeting this requirement. These local agencies are looking for innovative, research-proven alternatives to their current programs, and this is precisely what Teacher Professional Development Institutes will provide.

Nationwide, projects developed to conform to the Yale-New Haven Institute model have proven to be successful in providing innovative teacher professional development. Virtually all teacher participants felt substantially strengthened in their mastery of content knowledge and their teaching skills. My proposal would open this opportunity to many more urban teachers and would provide high quality professional development to educators and policy makers throughout the Nation. In this way, we can set high standards for effective teacher professional development as we have done for student achievement outcomes.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Teachers Professional Development Institutes Act be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak on the issue of currency policies and to offer a bill, the Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005, that will address key concerns regarding the Treasury Department's statutory review and reporting requirements on currency manipulation. In particular, this bill strengthens Treasury's hand in addressing currency manipulation, including the current practices of countries such as China.

Through the practice of pegging its currency to the dollar, China artificially maintains the yuan, at 8.28 per dollar. While economists differ over the extent that China's currency is undervalued, it is often estimated to be undervalued by as much as fifteen to forty percent, rendering Chinese manufactured goods cheaper in the U.S.--and U.S. manufactured goods more expensive in China.

China's deliberate and unfair currency practices have contributed to our Nation's trade deficit with China, reaching a record $162 billion last year. The yuan's undervaluation has had a profound impact on our Nation's manufacturing sector--particularly on U.S. manufacturing employment.

As Chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Co-Chair of the Senate Task Force on Manufacturing, and a Senator from a State with a rich history in manufacturing, I am keenly aware of this issue's importance. Indeed, our manufacturers--who are integral to our economic security and national defense-- unjustifiably struggle to compete with countries that disregard their international obligations.

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission released a report today, which focuses on China's exchange rate problem. In the report, the Commission notes that foreign exchange markets are sending clear signals that China should revalue its yuan, and that in recent years all major currencies have adjusted upward with the exception of China's. The Commission explains that an appreciation of foreign currencies is needed to help correct the U.S. current account deficit.

In the report, the Commission discusses the value of improving the process by which the Treasury Department assesses and reports upon the issue of foreign countries' currency manipulation. The legislation that I offer today, which is cosponsored by Senator Dole, makes substantial improvements to that process.

Chair Manzullo, my counterpart in the House of Representatives is offering this bill today in the House. I thank him for his leadership on issues affecting our Nation's small businesses, and particularly for his efforts on behalf of our Nation's manufacturers.

Specifically, the legislation amends the Exchange Rates and Economic Policy Coordination Act of 1988, to clarify that a country is manipulating its currency if it is engaged in ``protracted large-scale intervention in one direction in the exchange market.''

The legislation also amends the 1988 Act to eliminate the necessity that a country have both a material global current account surplus and a significant bilateral trade surplus with the United States, before the Secretary of the Treasury is required to enter into negotiations with the offending country to end its unfair practices. The change requires such negotiations if there is either a material global current account surplus or a significant bilateral trade surplus with the United States.

Currently, the Treasury Department, the International Monetary Fund, and others rely largely upon suspect Chinese data in determining China's trade balance with other countries. The legislation's final provision instructs the Treasury Department to undertake an exercise examining China's trade surplus. The investigation would include an analysis of why China's reported trade surplus with the U.S. and other countries differs from that reported by China's trading partners. The legislation requires that the Treasury Department submit a report of its investigation to Congress.

Representative Manzullo and I will continue to collaborate on addressing unfair currency practices by offending countries. We Are both well aware of the negative effects these practices have on our Nation's small businesses. One of our combined efforts commissioned a General Accounting Office study which examined issues related to foreign government manipulation of world currency markets. That study is expected to be released soon.

As in the past, I will continue to strive to draw greater attention to the effects of China's currency practices

and to find solutions that enable our domestic industries to compete on a level and fair playing field.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and that a section- by-section summary of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise with several of my colleagues to speak about the importance of the renewal of the Burma sanctions. I also wish to speak candidly about the Burmese Military Junta's continued oppression of their people through rape, torture and other severe human rights abuses.

As the world's only imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize recipient, Aung San Suu Kyi continues to inspire the democracy movement and seek support for their peaceful cause. It has been reported that the National League for Democracy has collected more than 300,000 signatures on a petition calling for change in the country. Those who sign are actively putting their lives in danger by publicly stating that they seek democratic change and some 1,400 political prisoners are locked up for supporting human rights and democracy.

The human rights abuses in Burma continue daily against ethnic minorities, political activists and others who simply suffer as innocent bystanders. A 2002 Human Rights Watch report found that Burma has nearly 70,000 child soldiers in its army, more than any other country in the world. Up to 2 million people have been forced to flee the country as refugees and migrants and the burning of villages continues in eastern Burma, especially in the Karen and Karenni states. Last year I drew to your attention a report titled ``Shattering Silences'', in which the Karen Women's Organization carefully investigated and recorded the Burmese military regime's use of rape as a weapon of war against ethnic minority women, revealing a shockingly brutal and callous practice.

For the past two years, I have joined my colleagues in reauthorizing the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, which bans mainly textile and garment imports from Burma. When I chaired the East Asia and Pacific Subcommittee I held a hearing on this very subject. In that hearing I spoke about the importance of a multilateral isolation policy. I urge my colleagues to consider the strides that have been made in just two years of promoting such a policy.

In a major and important move, the European Union, in October 2004, followed the lead of the United States and significantly strengthened its sanctions on Burma, including a ban on investments in enterprises of the ruling regime and a strengthened visa ban. The EU also pledged to join the United States in opposing loans to Burma's regime from the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. The European Parliament passed a resolution calling ``on the UN Security Council to address the situation in Burma as a matter of urgency.'' Additionally, 289 members of the British parliament tabled a motion calling on the UN Security Council to address the situation in Burma.

After both houses of Congress passed resolutions in October 2004 calling on the UN Security Council to address the situation in Burma, the parliament of Australia followed suit. The Australian motion called on the government to, ``support the Burmese National League for Democracy's call for the UN Security Council to convene a special session to consider what further measures the UN can take to encourage democratic reform and respect for human rights in Burma.''

Support at the United Nations is growing as well. Burma was one of only a few countries on which resolutions were passed by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. This was led by the European Union with strong support from the United States as well as support from Japan. The resolution strongly condemned what it called ``the systematic ongoing violation of human rights'' in Burma.

There has been unprecedented action on Burma within ASEAN. Whereas in the past ASEAN refused to even comment on what it deemed Burma's ``internal affairs'', many members of the organization are now publicly pressuring Burma to step aside as the chair of the association in 2006.

The tough approach maintained by the United States towards Burma, including import sanctions and a possible boycott of 2006 meetings, is for the first time encouraging many Asian nations to rethink whether the Burmese regime should assume the rotating chairmanship. There is widespread belief within the leadership of ASEAN countries that Burma has failed to deliver on its promises to the region.

In all of the above-mentioned instances, the strong stand of the United States has influenced countries around the world. The movement at the EU, UN, and within ASEAN is unprecedented. We must keep up the tough pressure by the United States.

I urge my colleagues to reauthorize the sanctions as a strong and clear signal that the United States will not support this brutal regime and their continued oppression of activists and minorities.